chances are, you're not made of money, so don't overpay for motorcycle insurance. geico, see how much you could save. ♪ ♪ ♪

i don't want any trouble. i don't want any trouble either. ♪ [ enginturns over ] [ siren wailing in distance ] you know you forgot to take your mask off, right? we should probably get out of here. ♪ [ male announcer ] introducing the all-new beetle convertible. now every day is a top-down day. that's the power of german engineering. >> some of the republican leaders on capitol hill are going to be talking about the sequester four hours from now. >> i've never heard that determine sequester, i can't imagine big news happening. >> that's right, thanks for joining us everybody. >> "america live" starts right now. >> megyn: fox news alert on a

big development in the gun control debate as we get reports that the u.s. supreme court may decide to hear a case that could ultimately make it illegal to carry a concealed weapon. welcome to america live, everyone, i'm megyn kelly. a big legal question today after two significant and contradictory court rulings in federal court last week. a federal appeals court in illinois deciding that a person's right to carry a concealed weapon is not protected under the second amendment, while a similar court in colorado refused to reconsider a previous ruling that the state's ban on concealed carry is unconstitutional. because of this contradiction and the fact that similar cases are on the docket in a number of states, legal experts are now predicting the u.s. supreme court will wind up ruling on the constitutionality of american's right to carry a concealed weapon. and that's a significant development in this effort for greater gun control. trace gallagher joins us now

with the news on that, trace? >> and megyn, and while you have all of this focus whether congress is going to enact legislation to limit semi automatic weapons and assault rifles, these different rulings you talked about in federal court could really be the game changer when you talk about the subject and you have to look at how adamant the different courts were in making their rulings. for example, in colorado, the 10th circuit court of apools says the second amendment does not give you the right to carry a concealed weapon, writing in the ruling in light of our nation's extensive practice of citizen's freedom to carry firearms in a concealed manner, we hold that this does not hold within the scope of the second amendment protection. but now, listen to the ruling from the 7th circuit court of appeals in chicago, saying and again, i'm quoting here, the right to bear, as distinct from the right to keep arms is unlikely to refer to the home. to speak of bearing arms

within one's home at all times awkward usage, a right to bear arms thus implies a right to carry a loaded gun outside the home. now, last year, you had the second circuit court of new york that ruled that new york residents have to prove that they face danger to obtain a concealed carry permit. the 9th circuit court in california. the fourth circuit in virginia also set to take up this issue, so, as you said, the showdown will likely end up in the supreme court, megyn, and here is why that's key. because the court of course has ruled the second amendment protects the right to own guns and that state and local governments should recognize that right. but the supreme court has not yet rules on rights to carry guns outside of the home and that's where this decision boils down to. keep in mind, 8 million americans have conceal carry permits, megyn, and now you hear from smith & wesson and other gun makers that the sales of handguns are far exceeding the sales of any

types of rifles or other weapons. >> wow. >> megyn. >> what a case that will be, if it goes up, trace. thank you. how likely is it that the u.s. supreme court will take up such a charged case. the lawyers are going to ask and when you have the decided circuits, that's, that's like red meat for the u.s. supreme court. that's exactly the kind of case they take. coming up next hour, we'll debate the likelihood and we will question how the court might rule. what are the odds right now? keep in mind when the assault weapons ban was placed, went in law back in '94 the n.r.a. didn't want cases going up to the supreme court then. they didn't like the supreme court, didn't think it was gun friendly, they may feel different now, should they feel comfortable? we'll take a fair and balanced look at it coming up. also new developments today with president obama's health care law. as questions come up about a company that has been awarded a 340 million dollar loan to set up these health insurance

exchanges. despite having a history of consumer and regulatory complaints, i mean, lots of complaints, now, the house oversight committee started asking questions about the company and how exactly it got selected to participate in obamacare, given its checkered history. and that committee just told us within the hour, that it is now getting some responses to its inquirienquiries, we're not, but stu varney is on the fox business network and he's up to speed. so, stu, it just so happens that this company we're talking about, that's going to help, you know, we talk about the exchanges under obamacare and i refer to it like the expedia.com, you go online and say, this is how old i am, my medical history. what are my options? they say you can have this plan and this plan and under obamacare, the government is creating these supposedly nonprofit entities that are going to compete with private

insurance companies. well, one of these nonprofit companie 340 million dollar loan from the feds and it turns out that's the person who started that company knows the man at the top. >> you're accurate entirely. the person we're talking about is sarah horowitz, an old friend and colleague of president obama. she set up, in some years ago, she set up something called the free-lancers insurance and that is a cooperative organization getting 340 million dollars from obamacare to set up a cooperative exchange. there is an ideological link and a personal link to the president and sarah horowitz. 340 million dollars money at stake. it turns out that new york regulators looking at the free-lancers insurance calls it the worst insurance company in two consecutive years. the criteria for deciding what is the worst i'm not clear on,

but they called it the worst insurance company for two consecutive years. now, look at the ideological contents here. this is a cooperative organization. it's one of 24 which are being set up under obamacare. a cooperative health insurance exchange is essentially a nonprofit, it is hostile to the idea of profit in medicine, it is a private enterprise, it's a non-- the exact opposite of private enterprise, and it's owned by members and its clients. it is essentially socialized medicine large. and 2 billion dollars worth of taxpayer money is going towards setting up essentially socialized medicine health insurance exchanges, of which miss horowitz's organization is one. ideological contamination and personal here. >> megyn: is there any question of miss horowitz's connection to president obama. looking at the articles online and examiner, they claim they

were members after founding group back in 2008. and they worked together very closely in connection with george soros and suddenly the records start today sort of get scrubbed clean of any association between president obama and sarah horowitz and winds up with 340 million dollars in loans so she can help service obamacare despite the fact her company is not well-respected from the look of it and its reviews in new york state. >> that's the personal relationship which was expunged after 1999. sarah horowitz and president obama, or then state senator obama were considered to be core members of this pressure group funded by george soros, after 1999 mr. obama's name was scrubbed from the record to eradicate a connection between the two. the connection was strongly there, and the two were considered core members of this organization set up by

george soros. this is the left exercising, stressing influencing public policy on the use of george soros' money and community organization, that's the link. >> megyn: there's a question about why, why the feds would allow this group, miss horowitz's group to participate in obamacare, despite what-- you listed off a couple, but in 2011, the new york and state insurance department ranked her company last among commercial insurance saying she had the most complaints and she was 49th of 50th among the state's insurance providers in 2012 ranked her company worst in terms of complaintsg all new york-based insurers, are we privy to the criteria, was this kathleen sebelius who gave this to her. >> i'm not. >> megyn: or open and notorious thing that says this is why sarah horowitz wants? >> i have nod looked at it as closely as that. i will say that maybe the subtext of obamacare is the

desire for socialized medicine and to set up cooperative exchanges is one step in that process and to commit 2 billion dollars of taxpayer money towards the setting up of essentially socialized medical organizations. that is taking a step towards socialized medicine which, as i say, could be a subtext of obamacare. >> megyn: and again, the washington examiner piece suggests that little is known on how the fed evaluated the applicants for these loans. >> i don't have the criteria. >> megyn: and we don't know the criteria either and apparently she's moved on and now sarah horowitz picked to serve as a three-year term in new york, but her organization is the one that's at issue here, so, it's an interesting question. we'll continue to watch the house oversight committee to see whether they have problems with what's been done here. stuart, thank you. >> megyn. >> megyn: we're hearing questions whether former senator chuck hagel has shared everything congress needs to know before they vote on him

as our next defense secretary and they believe the vote could happen tomorrow or could there be something dramatic in the two mideast speeches he's refusing to share with congress. new trouble from chuck hagel from a powerful group and we'll tell you after the break who it is. and a retailer with big presence in the u.s. after inspector found horse meat in food this company is selling overseas. that's what they say. the comfort you and say, well, here in the u.s. there wouldn't be any? they say there isn't. if you've ever suspected your local snowplow driver of having evil intentions? who hasn't? wait until you see the video of the local snowplow driver. (bleep), the favorite of my day the (bleep) people off day. part of the day, because as you can see, i push this back over the (bleep) road, baby.

oh, i'm sorry, what you got on there. hee, hee. >> [ male announcer ] research suggests cell health plays a key role throughout our lives. one a day men's 50+ is a complete multivitamin designed for men's health concerns as we age. it has 7 antioxidants to support cell health. one a day men's 50+.

[ male announcer ] a car has a rather small rear-view mirror, so we can occasionally glance back at where we've been. it has an enormous windshield so we can look ahead to where we are going. now is always the time to go forward. and reimagine all the possibilities that lie before us. an ally for real possibilities. aarp. find tools and guidance at aarp.org/possibilities. [ construction sounds ] ♪ [ watch ticking ] [ engine revs ]

come in. ♪ got the coffee. that was fast. we're outta here. ♪ [ engine revs ] ♪

>> fox's weather alert now. airports in the texas panhandle is closed and national guard called off and the massive winter snow blankets the area with a foot of snow. and jd? >> two sides of the story, we're talking severe weather and blizzard conditions, let's talk about the severe weather threat. tornado watch 8 p.m. local time for north florida and apalachicola area and tornado warnings meaning that we've spotted some water spouts moving on shore. the other side of this, the cold side of this, the blizzard conditions, up to 20 inches of snow for the texas panhandle, up towards oklahoma and kansas, and deteriorating conditions throughout the afternoon, and we have reports of people stranded on i-40, closed down and the national

guard going out to rescue people. through tuesday, we're going to look at the potential for areas of 6 to 12 inches in areas that saw close to more than a foot of snow and winds in excess of 65 miles per hour and up to 24 inches of snow, megyn, so this is a very dangerous situation unfolding. we'll keep you up-to-date with the latest from the fox news extreme weather center. >> megyn: all right. janice dean, thank you. well, some new challenges today for former senator chuck hagel as the senate gets ready it vote on this man as our next defense secretary. during last month's confirmation hearing, senator promised to turn over documents on views to iran and israel and with the controversial issue in his process. he and the white house have since decided to move back and today a possible group is suggesting the senate may want to learn more before holding that vote. a powerful left leaning group. and joining me is an attorney

and director of the law fair project. so, one of the more powerful jewish groups, humanitarian groups that spokes out and jewish and israeli issues have written we remain concerned, he didn't say how he would approach iran and israel and carefully review this man's record. he appeared to endorse a policy of containment on a nuclear iran before he was told by lawmakers that we don't have a policy of containment. so, even these jewish groups, at least this powerful one seems unhappy right now we're going to have a vote on hagel tomorrow, what does it tell you. >> it tells me that the jewish groups stepped up and bottom line they're he repeating the same concerns that have been repeated over and over again, by a wide variety of groups and the fact of the matter is that there are shared implications for the u.s. and israeli national security, but all americans should be be concerned. when you have a nominee for secretary of defense, someone who will be in charge, if he

is confirmed, as yours and i national security. athink that iran, ariran has a legitimate government in place, and those are opposite to what obama's positions were when he was a senator, this is something that everybody should be concerned with. and first, the administration was pushing the lines of the neo cons were preventing the confirmation process and they were saying the pro israel lobby preventing it, but the fact of the matter is this white house has put forth one of the most controversial nominees of all times and historically unprecedented that the secretary of defense will be confirmed with over 11 senators voting against him and that's exactly what is going to happen. >> because the number, the previous record was 11 and now we expect dozens. >> we expect 45 senators to vote against him. >> megyn: yeah, and a question about what that says. now, one of the other things that's out there. apparently he hasn't responded. responded to senator lindsey graham's last two letters and

that office confirming to us today. in particular, whether he accused israel of approaching apartheid and whether he called benjamin netanyahu a radical. why not respond to these questions and why not turn over the speeches and be an open book as he expressly said he would. everything is out there and we're going to make every effort to provide it and that does not appear in fact what they decided to do. >> this coming from the self-proclaimed most transparent administration in u.s. history. and hagel, during the confirmation hearing, expressly promised that he was going to turn over information on who was funding him, who was funding his organization, who was going to turn over the content of those speeches. but they backtracked on those promises so it's absolutely legitimate to question, not just pro israel groups, but all of the americans should question exactly what hagel stands for. >> in fact, they're going to say the more he gives them. more likely they are to try to shoot them up over minor

issues, sort of, the more rope you give a by, the more likely he is to hang himself. he's giving himself the rope and hagel saying, this doesn't make sense for me, i can get through if i don't turn the stuff over. if i give it to them he. even if it's neutral or minorly controversial. >> look the at the record. he doesn't have to turn over information to be a questionable choice for secretary of defense. hagel refused to sign a letter that asked the eu to declare hezbollah a designated terrorist group. he doesn't want to dictate foreign policy. the fact of the matter is members of congress who enact the legislation determining that it's illegal to provide support for terrorist groups like hezbollah and hamas and hagel said we need not to go at this alone and cross border support to defeat hamas and it's extremely troubling that the so-called future, perhaps future secretary of defense refuses to work across the

pond, to ensure the safety of america. >> at a time when we are, remember, the netanyahu speech before the u.n. and showing the red and the bomb and tipping point. at a time when we have israel making real warnings about iran getting nukes and what israel would do in response this is the guy heading up the pentagon and obviously israel will want our help if they find themselves in an armed conflict with iran. what are the stakes for israel in seeing hagel? president obama is going to set that policy not hagel, right? but he's got some independent power. >> well, look, the question is, what kind of message are we sending the enemies of the united states which are also the enemies of all person liberal democracies, including our ally in the middle east on the front line on the war of islamist terrorism. last week hamas in its newspaper published an article, saying that a confirmation of hagel of

secretary of defense would be in its favor and reduce the likelihood of the united states and iran getting nuclear weapons and reduce the united states supporting israel from defeating hamas and this is from a designated terrorist group and beyond that, is he an effective leader? does he have the credibility to reach across the aisle and do what he says he's going to do with the republicans, for example? >> i'm sure he would have rather not had the help from hamas. thank you for your perspective. >> thanks for having me. >> megyn: and we are now seeing a growing number of gun companies pledging to stop doing business with any state or local government passing firearm restrictions, what it could mean for the police departments across the country and administration has gone to war with one of the most famous reporters in a fight whether president obama is honest about the automated budget cuts due to take effect in days. it's the white house versus bob woodward.

[ kate ] many women may not be absorbing the calcium they take

as well as they could because they don't take it with food. switch to citracal maximum plus d. it's the only calcium supplement that can be taken with or without food. my doctor recommends citracal maximum. it's all about absorption. [ male announcer ] the rhythm of life. [ whistle blowing ] where do you hear that beat? campbell's healthy request soup lets you hear it... in your heart. [ basketball bouncing ] heart healthy. great taste. mmm... [ male announcer ] sounds good. it's amazing what soup can do.

>> troubling reports today that the huge global retailer ikea has been swept up in the widening horse meat scandal. a the they found horse meat in batches that were shipped to different countries. they make furniture and why are they selling meatballs or buying your meatballs from a furniture company. i guess they have cafeterias and serve horse meat in the cafeteria. that's not good. a bbc investigation found that the beef may have been mislabeled after being shipped from romaina to the netherlands and the stores in the united states have not been affected so there you go. they keep saying the united states doesn't have the horse meat in any of its beef.

well, the gun industry is fighting back in a battle over the second amendment. dozens of companies are joining a boycott refusing to sell firearms and ammunition to law enforcement agencies in states they claim are restricting gun rights. trace gallagher has that live from our west coast bureau, trace. >> reporter: the states that they claim are restricting gun rights are california, colorado and new york, so, now, you have 44 different gun companies that are refusing to sell either ammunition or weapons to police agencies in nos states. now, the reason i say 44 right now is because that's double the number from just five days ago and the number is also expected to rise. now, the common theme of all of these gun companies they're not about to sell police weapons that are not available to the general public and as they issue their protests, most of them also make statements. here are three of them. one saying, quoting here, while we can't stop the travelling of rights that are

occurring there, we certainly can make sure that we don't assist in any way going forward. another saying, quote, if you are government agency with a policy of restricting our constitutional rights we ask that you take our tax dollars and spend it somewhere else and we're appreciative of the sacrifices made by the law enforcement community, but more appreciative of the rights guaranteed to all law abiding u.s. citizens by the second amendment to the u.s. constitution. one gun shop owner in arizona recounts the story of a california police officer coming in wanting to buy a weapon. and the gun shop owner reduced and the police officer responded look, civilians do not need these types of guns and the owner asked him to leave and we should point out that we haven't found a single police agency from any of these three states that has now responded to this protest from the gun companies not selling them weapons. megyn. 44 right now, and could be much higher by the end of the

week. >> all right, trace, thanks. okay. we're now learning more about a bloody cricket bat found at model reeva steenkamp's murder scene. remember this? there were initial reports i thought she was an intruder, why were there reports that her skull was crushed in and we thought initially the reports were wrong. well, now, they've doubled down on those reports, there is a lengthy detailed report out on this today. and we will tell you all about it and whether this is it, whether this is the critical piece of evidence in this case against the blade runner. and senator john mccain is slam ago local tv staying and cable outlet msnbc running a sound bite that made him appear insensitive to the mother of a shooting victim. we'll play you the senator's entire remarks and then the edited version and let you decide. plus, new reports that the white house has gone to war with legendary journalist bob

woodward in a fight over whether the president is being honest in this debate over the budget cuts that are due to kick in at the end of this week. >> won't help the economy, won't create jobs, now, if congress allows this meat cleaver approach to take place, it will jeopardize our military readiness. ] truth i, nyquil doesn't unstuff your nose. what? [ male announcer ] alka-seltzer plus liquid gels speeds relief to your worst cold symptoms plus has a decongestant for your stuffy nose. thanks. that's the cold truth! [ whispering ] that's crazy, the cookie's the best part. crème. cooe. crème. stop yelling. you stop yelling. [ whispering ] both of you stop yelling. [ whispering ] i'm trying to read. [ male announcer ] choose your side at oreo.com.

that's a good thing, but it doesn't cover everything. only about 80% of your part b medical expenses. the rest is up to you. so consider an aarp medicare supplement insurance plan,

insured by unitedhealthcare insurance company. like all standardized medicare supplement plans, they pick up some of what medicare doesn't pay. and save you up to thousands of dollars in out-of-pocket costs. call today to request a free decision guide to help you better understand what medicare is all about. and which aarp medicare supplement plan works best for you. with these types of plans, you'll be able to visit any doctor or hospital that accepts medicare patients... plus, there are no networks, and you'll never need a referral to see a specialist. there's a range of plans to choose from, too. and they all travel with you. anywhere in the country. join the millions who have already enrolled in the only medicare supplement insurance plans endorsed by aarp, an organization serving the needs of people 50 and over for generations... and provided by unitedhealthcare insurance company, which has over 30 years of experience behind it.

call today. remember, medicare supplement insurance helps cover some of what medicare doesn't pay -- expenses that could really add up. these kinds of plans could save you up to thousands in out-of-pocket costs... you'll be able choose any doctor who accepts medicare patients. and you never need referrals. so don't wait. with all the good years ahead, look for the experience and commitment to go the distance with you. call now to request your free decision guide. this easy-to-understand guide will answer some of your questions, and help you find the aarp medicare supplement plan that's right for you. >> well, there's a new budget battle brewing in washington. one between the white house and legendary journalist bob woodward.

the obama administration now slamming the reporter in a blame game over who is responsible over the automatic budget cuts set to go into effect on friday and president obama had the first responders, telling they were going to lose their jobs and it was the republican's fault so on so forth and it came out a reference to bob woodward's book and he claims this was all president obama's idea. and now the finger pointing actually began during the third presidential debate last fall and listen to president obama's remarks about these budget cuts known as the sequester. >> the sequester is not something that i proposed, it's something that congress has proposed. it will not happen. >> megyn: i will not happen and i didn't propose is. not true, says woodward. who was granted intimate access to the white house during research for his latest book, the price of politics. in a washington post editorial on friday woodward wrote, the jez and lew, meaning jack lew had this wrong. my research for price of politics show the spending

cuts were initiated by the white house and the brainchild of lew and rob nabors. now the white house is pushing back on bob woodward and bob woodward is pushing back again against the white house. joining me now for a fair and balanced debate, ben shapiro, breitbart news and author of the book "bullies how the left culture of intim nation and fear silences america" and julie, former advisor to senator lautenberg. all right. this is getting -- this is getting a little uncomfortable. they're fighting with somebody they love so much they gave him all of this access to the white house, but they only love him, apparently, ben, when he's saying what they want him to say because they're taking direct shots at him now, and he is -- he doesn't care,'s not going away quietly, saying i'm telling you, they're not being honest. >> i would imagine this is the last time bob woodward is going to have intimate access to the white house.

we've seen by this white house, the media outlets that are treating the white house, they're sloan scooby treats, they're lap dogs. and we saw this past week, politico had a piece, questioning obama's transparency and they were uninvited to the politico that was included in that and not surprising they're going after reporter. they have a tight list, not fond of taking questions and the at the governor's meeting last night, president obama said let's have the press get out of here so i can answer some questions. this is sort of the way they handle the press now. >> megyn: you know, julie, it's one of those things who you believe. do you believe the white house that has the political stake in this or bob woodward who is not known for bashing the left or making up lies about president obama, so on. i mean, is there a credibility problem with-- i'm not talking about president obama, but the spokesperson, jay carney who's

coming out and calling bob woodward wellfully wrong and woodward writing back and saying this is a classic case of distortion and confusion by the white house? >> i have no nod, i truly have no idea what went on, but i do have to say this is typical d.c. nonsense that makes me very happy i don't live down there or work down there anymore because this is typical nonsense, a reporter has said one thing, we need something else. let's figure out who to blame, meanwhile, a sequester that both sides seem to agree is not the best idea and instead they're focusing whether they're going to blame bob woodward and bob woodward whether he's going to blame the process rather than break news on the actual sequester. this is exactly why people in this country are fed up with d.c. and exhibit a. i saw the story and i thought a pox on both the houses, a pox on "the washington post" and the white house. >> megyn: why do you put a pox on bob woodward for the purposes of this question take him at his word that what he

reported in his book and the washington post piece is true, that the white house, that the white house came up with this idea and that what he heard president obama say in that dehe bait was absolutely wrong and what he's saying now is not true. >> okay. >> megyn: that's your obligation as a reporter to come out and report the facts. >> good for him, but my point is actually the larger point which is who cares whose stupid idea this was and-- >> well, dishonesty by a president if that's what woodward is alleging is irrelevant. >> i don't care if the president is at fault and let's give bob woodward that, the bottom line, he doesn't think this is the best thing to dorks the republicans-- >> i get you. but then what i'm trying to get at. >> no he. >> megyn: the question, and broet sid both sides are to blame. they both agreed to it and that's what people-- the democrats the republicans, president obama agreed, but the question is, for this purpose, for this discussion, ben, is do we care whether the president was or the white house is abbing it tiffly misleading? >> yes, because the white house does this on a regular basis. not only do they do this on a

regular basis and treat the media as the obama drool cup carrying folks that they are, but they actually are actively lying-- if woodward is correct and what we're seeing here the obama administration portraying the sequester as the end of 2012 the movie, the world is going to clams. cut 2.4% of spending, towers collapse, people will be skilled, teachers will be fired and if it turns out at that obama proposed this thing, he gets the blame for this. the truth is republicans are as much to blame. world is going to end if we cut future spending. guys, if you want to win the debate suggest to americans hey, maybe if we cut government spending maybe not, it could be a good thing. or wise stepping into the obama camp. >> it's like calling woodward willfully wrong, he also did offer a public statement last week, saying the sequester, and i quote, was an idea the

white house put forward and there he seems to be accepting as woodward put it, paternity of the idea and at the same time calling woodward a liar, and suggesting that this was, this originated with the rblgs. >> yeah, this is the kind of thing that turns off the american public. it does and both sides, you're right, the white house messaging on this is crazy and inconsistent, the republicans messaging on this is crazy and inconsistent and they want to cut spending, but yet, when it comes to sequester, they don't want to cut spending on the one hand spending is, you know, some people say, something we have to cut immediately and obama's fault and what is happening and shouldn't cut spending and again, this is why people want to-- and day in, day out. i work in politics, and i'm at the point where i can't take it anymore, and i can't imagine how people who don't pay attention on a daily basis just once in a while deal with it. >> megyn: we're at the point we don't expect washington to tell us the truth. is that where we are, ben? it's not that big a shock. >> honestly, i don't think it's the larger point is about

the sequester, the larger point it about the relationship of the obama administration and the white house in general. what i see over and over now, is that every time the white house wants to get a narrative out. they go to a few specific outlets they enjoy going to. and when one of the outlets has the daring to say something mildly against the president of the united states he immediately cuts them off at the knees. this is an active attempt by the white house and democratic party to openly say that these med media has to carry their message or attacked like bob woodward is. even assuming that he's wrong on this, the idea that they're going to come out and attack bob woodward personally if he was, he mistakesenly reported it it as opposed to let's have is a discussion what happened here and how did the story happen. goes to show this is a white house that's vindictive and treat the media as though they are the, they are the abusive father and the children who are being abused are the media. if they're good abusive father treats them well today.

if they are bad out to the outhouse they go. >> megyn: inconsistent for the children. and woodward has an interesting thesis in the washington post, and he quotes the president the sound where he said specifically that this was not something, that the sequester is not something that i proposed and woodward goes on to say not only did president obama personally approve of the plan, to propose the sequester, but he said specifically then his lieutenant did so at 2:30 p.m. july 27th, 2011 i mean, the man's got dates, he's got times,'s got pa got the exact sequence in which he claims it happened. and then he's got jay carney last week saying in fact, it was an idea the white house put forward. it's interesting to hear a pushback in any event. who knows, right? we'll watch it play out. in the meantime looks like the budget cuts take place on friday. panel, thank you both. >> thank you. >> thank you much. >> megyn: we told you last week, one man is asking hollywood to step up and speak out for the pakistani doctor

in jail for helping the united states catch usama bin laden. last night, one group stepped up again, show you who that was. if you suspect that your local driver may be needing glasses or perhaps more sleep, or perhaps it's just a jerk, well, you may need to seehis video. >> (bleep), oh, yeah, baby, look at (bleep) snow piling up. yeah. like a (bleep) factory. and snow like (bleep)-- hi. i'm henry winkler.

and i'm here to tell homeowners that are 62 and older about a great way to live a better retirement. it's called a reverse mortgage. [ male announcer ] call right now to receive your free dvd and booklet with no obligation. it answers questions like how a reverse mortgage works, how much you qualify for, the ways to receive your money, and more. plus, when you call now, you'll get this magnifier with l.e.d. light absolutely free.

when you call the experts at one reverse mortgage today, you'll learn the benefits of a government-insured reverse mortgage. it will eliminate your monthly mortgage payments and give you tax-free cash from the equity in your home. and here's the best part -- you still own your home. take control of your retirement today. ♪ ♪ >> well, some big dramatic developments i should say in the the murder of reeva steenkamp. allegedly at the hands of oscar pistorius, the olympic athletes phone as the blade runner. new details from reeva steenkamp's autopsy, show her

skull was crutch allegedly by a bloody convict bat before she was shot in the the head. and these are not yet reports from fox, they came in the daily mail. alleged that he used the cricket bat to break down the door after he shot her several times realized he shot his girlfriend and not the intruder. the prosecutor failed to mention anything about the cricket bat or crushed skull during last week's bail hearing, so are we to believe the reports? lis wiehl, the fox news former federal prosecutor. this is so confusing to me. before we got to the bail hearing there were reports of this and we talked about that. >> right. >> megyn: we get to the bail hearing, the prosecution said nothing about it led me to believe they don't have it. >> and why, why wouldn't they mention it? why would wouldn't the lead investigator say nothing at the crime scene is inconsistent with oscar's story. >> in this country we would hold thingses back as a prosecutor at a bail hearing and you don't want to give everything to the defense and

you don't want the defense to have that information, megyn and keep that back. >> megyn: they get it eventually. >> vufl they get it. it doesn't make sense here, because what was the ultimate result? he got let out. he got bail. so if they had released that evident and if it were to be true that they knew it, and this is now a few days later and forensics are coming through days later. if they really have that evidence that it just blows his defense completely, blows it. it's over. exactly over. >> megyn: it's on the record with the cricket bat interesting he mentioned it, and keep in mind and tell the viewers, he's the one who did mention it in court and clearly felt the need to explain a bloody cricket bat at the scene and saying i had to knock down the door. >> it makes sense, if you take the back step from last week, that could be plausible you're going to knock down the door and main her blood would be found on the bat when she fell after the shooting, not to be too graphic, may have fallen

on the bat. you can see that. but if now they've got the forensics to show she was beaten in the skull with the bat before the bathroom, the shooting, it doesn't -- everything doesn't hold water so the only thing i can think of with the prosecution, they just, if it's true, this evidence is true, they didn't have it last week. they are saying that he crushed her skull with a cricket bat before shooting her dead. this is the daily mail, police have told her family they admit that those details were withheld with the bail application hearing, but say that grieving relatives who saw her body describe the horrific injuries from the cricket bat in addition to the gunshot wounds. >> megyn: and that would account. >> if you you think about his story further, why she was dressed in street clothes and there in the small little bathroom area because she was trying to-- she'd been beaten in the head with this bat. she ran and you can see the scene, she ran into the bathroom, locked the door the door was locked when the shots were fired and that makes consistent sense. what doesn't, why the

prosecution didn't bring it out, but you know, forensics take time and you know, they're going to-- if her skull was crushed in a location other than where the bullet entered and not relate today the bullet wound, it's a major problem for him. he's claiming bullet wound through the door. self-defense. >> if there was an altercation between them and of course there's been reports that they were screaming before and actually now, more than one ear witness to that and we're going to hear more about that and now a surveillance video showing her pull up and we're trying to find out if there's a surveillance video arriving and there may be more surveillance video to come out. the question, if there is a skull injury, other than the bullet wound lis. >> right. >> megyn: and establish it was before the bullet wound they can in an autopsy. >> right in an autopsy and they may not have had last week. you've got to see from the defense perspective you're going to create any doubt that she had fallen or anything happened after the shots were fired that he iced the cricket bat just to get in not to

protect her, but to break open the door. but it happened before, there's no where for him to go. where is he going to go with that. >> megyn: two other things, now we hear that his brother is facing a murder charge, oscar pistorius' brother is. >> 2007 i think is the right here, it's manslaughter and a vehicular manslaughter and really should have nothing to do with this case. >> megyn: the two pistorius brothers and make you feel for the parents. >> feel for the parents, but should have nothing to do with his case absolutely. >> megyn: lis wiehl interesting discussion, thank you, ma'am. >> you got it it. >> megyn: we brought you the breaking news at the top of the hour, the supreme court may take on a case that could ultimately make it illegal to carry a concealed weapon and that legal debate is just ahead. wait until you meet dog the plow driver. >> oh, that's... now you see it, now you don't (bleep). it ain't my-- but their shakes aren't always made for people with diabetes.

that's why there's glucerna hunger smart shakes. they have carb steady, with carbs that digest slowly to help minimize blood sugar spikes. and they have six grams of sugars. with fifteen grams of protein to help manage hunger... look who's getting smart about her weight. [ male announcer ] glucerna hunger smart. a smart way to help manage hunger and diabetes. and i have a massive heart attack right in my driveway. the doctor put me on a bayer aspirin regimen. [ male announcer ] be sure to talk to your doctor before you begin an aspirin regimen. go talk to your doctor. you're not indestructible anymore.

>> watch this one. now you see it, oh, that's... now you see it, now you don't (bleep) >> oh, boy, that was mark huckney intentionally burying cars in the snow in lowell, massachusetts and may not have been the smartest career move he posted it online after a recent blizzard and how you wind up on "america live." >> reporter: he calls himself dogg with two g's and love the boston accent as he's burying the cars. he plowed from 22 hours in that blizzard and this is his favorite part of the day where you push the snow back towards the curb and the freshly shoveled driveways. >> you can obviously see there

are some cars over here, well, guess what? watch where that snow goes (bleep) over. geez. yes. you want to find your car? you come see me, i'll let you know where it is, maybe. (laughter) >> well, the video went viral and dogg with two g's went straight to the unemployment line and here is his boss. >> he will never plow for the city of lowell again. what he said was disrespectful to the residents of the city of lowell. >> now, mark dogg is apologizing kind of sort of once again. >> am i an idiot? yes, i'll be the first one to admit that. should i have taken a video? no, but basically i was doing my job. if you watch the video, and turn down the sound you'll see that i was doing my job

perfectly. . >> reporter: just for fun, let's watch the video and turn up the sound one more time. and you can decide if he is the perfect plower. watch again. >> and (bleep) see you later. you won't find that till spring. ha, ha, ha. by the way, the snowplow company has considered rehiring him not in the plow department, but as a demolition department. they do in the summertime. >> megyn: there's something likeable about him. is it just me? >> reporter: and you just --. >> megyn: all right. trace, thank you. coming up, we've heard a lot of warnings about the looming budget cuts, but maybe none as severe as those about our air traffic contollers and warnings about run away safety. runway safety and flight delays. those are next and senator john mccain is slamming a local tv station about a sound bite he says was unfairly edited. stay tuned.

>> fox news alert on the

sequester. gosh, that's a word, so weird that it's not good according to both parties and warnings of the dire consequences for our air safety, among many other things. brand new hour of america live. i'm megyn kelly. we've heard some serious concerns espoused for public safety and if lawmakers cannot agree on plan to avoid the deep cuts. affecting everything from military budgets to local police and fire we're told, but for the last three days it seems like transportation secretary ray lahood has been everywhere warning about everything from concerns about safety equipment to big flight delays, saying this week's automatic budget cuts are supposed to start on friday, doesn't happen at once, but supposed to start on friday, mean u.s. air travel could suffer whether you're at the terminal or at 30,000 feet. >> we will have to work with the airlines in slowing planes down, but there will be enough contollers to make sure that

planes are guided in and out of airports safely. flights to major cities, like new york, chicago and san francisco and others could experience delays up to 90 minutes, during peak hours. because we have fewer contollers on staff. cuts to budget mean preventive maintenance and quick repair of runway equipment, might not be possible which could lead to more delays. and once airlines see the potential impacts of these furloughs, we expect that they will change their schedules and cancel flights. >> chris stirewalt our fox power play editor. and we'll get to the dire warnings in just one second, but he's given that address from the white house press briefing room. why doesn't he walk down the hall and ask president obama in the oval office why he signed this into law. and that's his boss. hey, here all that bad stuff happened, it's your idea you signed that into law, why did you do that?

>> megyn, i think your idea it's a weird name, calling it the sequester maybe is the problem. what if they called it nicer sounding, maybe like the happy time cuts or something that sounded pleasant, people wouldn't be as freaked out about it it. >> megyn: sequester you do to the jury while they're trying to deliberate. sequester, that turns people off. i don't care about that, what's sequester can't affect me, but ray lahood says it's going to affect all of us and we better pay attention and he's not happy. and he's fear mongering and trying to scare us so that we pressure lawmakers not to do th this, but sitting at the airport and 90 minute delays, should have listened. >> there is a bit of self-fulfilli self-fulfilling prophesy in this and no one was taken to task and president obama called his team to do is ray lahood. he's definitely taken to it with gusto and issued some dire warnings about that.

>> he knows how to scare us. >> he does. and he has-- he's been in washington long enough to know how this game is played, once his republican congressman now, and democratic presidents on transportation, but look, the truth is that the cuts as they end up. they start out very small and they do build over time, but the scaring that they're talking about, the things they're talking about are based on decades, that this would be law for a decade that this would go on and on and on and we'd never have another budget in the next decade and never be any break to this divided government and impasse on fiscal matters. so they can use these big scary numbers and keep people going that way. but the truth is we're really just fighting about, i mahate to say this, we're fighting on the 27th of march not the 1st of march, and funding the government in the absence of a budget expires, all this scare tactics and all of this posturing that's going to take place between now and then is

an effort by the obama democrats to keep spending up when that measure goes through and the republicans are going to be fighting to push it down to the levels where the sequester are and they're going to have to fight it out until they find out where to pass something. >> i don't understand half of what you just said, but i'm going to question you on it in one second. first ask you this, you made a point in your power play saying that the dramatics, the drama out of the administration today are very consistent with what you saw at the -- as you were up late last night and all pushing midnight, watching the academy awards ceremony where there was a surprise appearance by our first lady, michelle obama the honor of announcing the best picture winner, that's the big award of the night, there's jack nicholson introducing michelle obama, saying it's argo, yea, yea, yea and you say the drama we saw from the first lady at the academy awards is nothing compared to what's happening with the president and his friends in the white house. >> and the best actor in a

drama award has to go to barack obama and it has been really since the republicans won in 2010, inside divided government. if you think about it we've got a four year long budget battle that we're just halfway through. and, but we have this endless budget battle that's going on and each time the president finds these crises, makes them sound and look as bad as possible, to get what he wants. think about the fiscal cliff we talked about at the beginning of the year. that wasn't a cliff they had a year to deal with the tax rate, by building up the momentum and the pressure and drama up to the deadline, remember, they hadn't done anything, nothing would have happened. they had all year to do the tax code, but he used the drama of the moment to get the republicans to do what he wants. >> megyn: now we see similar messages from washington and stand with the first responders behind him and we're going to be unsafe at our homes and delayed at the airport and all of these bad things because after deal he

proposed and signed into law and the republicans are just as guilty and they're just as guilty, but you know, he would have us believe that they're only guilty. they're the only ones guilty and everyone is guilty except for chris stirewalt, he and bret baier we don't have to blame. >> we're clean on this one. >> megyn: thank you. >> thank you, ma'am. >> megyn: i don't know, are they guilty or to be thanked? a lot of people think even though the budget cuts are indiscriminate and harsh at least they're cuts, tiny cuts if you look at the overall budget and at the time we're facing. and so, i'd love to know how you think about it. where do you fall? send me an e-mail, a tweet. @megyn kelly we're expecting an update on the status of negotiations today. house speaker john boehner and other g.o.p. leaders meet with the press at 4 p.m. today. there's no big meeting happening, they're not meeting with the president not a bipartisan brouhaha so people think it's going to happen and the cuts are going to happen and serious, especially to the

military and other folks furloughed. stay with fox news for the latest on the last minute negotiations before and if those cuts do kick in on friday. oh, it was a big win for a driver named jaimmy johnson at the daytona speedway and a female driver scored points as well and neither of those big moments are the highlights of this saturday's race. >> and tony stewart is going to win this race. but a terrible crash coming into the finish. >> a big, big crash. >> kyle larson's car-- >> at least 28 fans injured two critically when that crash took place in the last lap of the race and sent the car flying into the fence catapulting large pieces of the wreck, including an entire

tire into the stand and on top of spectators. trace gallagher has the story. >> reporter: in orlando, saying that 33 people injured including a 14-year-old boy who is critical and i want to show you the crash one more time at daytona, keep an eye on a couple of things, not just the crash which you've seen, but look at the stand and the reactions. and as this thing starts going, you've got kyle larson's car catapulting and 28 cars in all as it catapults towards the fans that separates the fans, keep in mind this is double reinforced and steel bars going through that and you can see the fans kind of scramble back taking cover and now come back and i want to kind of show you why. look at this thing here we talked about the bars in between them. look at this gaping hole up here in the left-hand corner of the screen and that's what this thing kind of pierced and there were hundreds of pieces of debris flying into the stand and you saw all the fans kind of running for cover at some point in time they were calling for emergency workers to come on scene and to the

next picture and get an idea how big that hole is. this is the gaping hole in the fence and this right here, that's part of the engine, and the tires. and you had a tire that came in and hit a woman and again, hundreds of pieces debris inside. now, daytona and nascar authorities are looking into this and investigating the strength of these fences as well as why exactly this entire thing happened. there's a lot of second guessing going on right now in daytona, megyn because they want to find out exactly why it is that this part of the fence crumbled like that, look, it's inherently dangerous to watch the races with, but when you have this kind of a crash at these speeds why they want a second look at the fences that separate the fans and there's even kind of a brick walkway there from the race track itself. and this thing could have been awful if some of those debris hit in different areas, but a tire hit a woman and a lot of debris hit a 14-year-old boy and a number of injuries in

that crash on saturday. >> megyn: terrible. all right, trace, thank you. >> reporter: yeah, okay. >> megyn: coming up, senator john mccain not happy about how a local tv station and a major cable outlet ran a sound bite that appeared to make him look insensitive to the mother of a shooting victim, one of the colorado movie theater shooting victim's mom. we'll show you the entire remarks and edited version and we'll let you decide whether someone was trying to make senator mccain look bad. the part of the oscar story, the rare red carpet shoutout for the man responsibility in part leading the u.s. to usama bin laden. we'll show it to you. and growing questions whether you can be fired for doing the right thing. kelly's court takes on the bartender who called the cops on a drunk driver, a vet. only to find herself without a job when everything was done. >> i called the police, i said we have a very drunk person

leaving the bar. he is going to kill someone or himself. i stand by what i did and i will do it again. [ kate ] many women may not be absorbing the calcium they take as well as they could because they don't take it with food. switch to citracal maximum plus d. it's the only calcium supplement that can be taken with or without food. my doctor recommends citracal maximum. it's all about absorption.

my doctor recommends citracal maximum. of harst-working, smoothesriding.lass it's got the most torque, the smoothest suspension, the best storage, class-leading comfort, and a revolutionary collection of versatile accessories. it's built on everything we've learned creating the world's best-selling utility side-by-sides. introducing the l new 60-horsepower ranger xp 900, a wholnew class of hardest-working, smoothest-riding.

>> senator john mccain expressing dismay over the editing of a video from a recent town haul. in it the senator was asked a question about his position on assault weapons by a woman who lost her son in the mass shooting at that aurora, colorado movie theater. here is how one local affiliate aired that exchange. a sound bite that later appeared on msnbc. >> my 24-year-old son was murdered in the movie theater in aurora, colorado. these assault weapons allow shooters to fire big round without having to load and these weapons do not belong on our streets. >> and i can tell you right now straight talk, the

congress of the united states. >> well, the reason senator mccain is upset because a big chunk that have exchange that he had with the woman, that editors at the other independent station and outlet decide today leave out. here is the whole thing. >> my 24-year-old son al was murdered in a movie theater in aurora, colorado by a gunman armed with military style assault weapons. he died a hero protecting his wife from rapid gunfire. that night a total... (inaudible) these assault weapons allow a shooter to fire rounds without having to reload and originally for military combat to kill a large number of people quickly. these weapons do not belong on our streets. do you, my question, a, do you support assault, the assault

weapons ban and support it as proposed by senator feinstein and b, do you support a ban on high capacity magazines, if not, why not? >> well, first of all, could i say thank you and god bless to t the... (applause) our hearts and our prayers go out to you and your family and i would just had a town hall meeting yesterday in tucson and there were people there who were affected by this terrible tragedy and shooting there. i met with mark kelly and gabby giffords in my office last week on this issue, as you know, they are becoming understandably great advocates on this issue and i will continue that conversation. i can tell you right now straight talk, that assault weapons ban will not pass the congress of the united states-- and he went on from there trying to say we will try to come up with ways to prevent this from happening again,

increased background checks, closing loopholes, other things like that, i appreciate your opinion, i promise you on my commitment to work with every member of congress to try to prevent this from happening again on and on. and joining us mark hanna, adjunct of media studies, and a former kerry and president obama campaigns and a reporter with the washington fr free beacon. there's no question the way at that independent station ktvk ran that and the way that cabling ran that is misleading and made john mccain seems insensitive, before he delivered that-- and your thoughts how far over the line they went? >> i think it's a case of confirmation bias and the telling aspect of it is maybe not the original edit. you know, they might have been time skoconstrained.

the way it was picked up on the left, it was reinforcing the notion of gun rights supporters that they are, that they simply don't care about the emotional aspect or the personal experiences of people affected by gun violence. and when you show the full clip that's clearly not the case, but i think you know, the reason that people were reluctant to maybe look into this and search out the full clip was that it reinforced views that they already have. >> megyn: you know, mark, in defense of ktvk and for that matter of rachel maddow, it happens sometimes, pull a clip, in the interest of time, you know, we all wish we had more staff, wish we could be more complete and you run a video that is edited inappropriate or winds up being misleading. what's the obligation, once it's realized that you've done that for said reporters? >> i think the important thing here is as you mentioned, megyn, is that you do need to reduce, you do need to excerpt any kind of time you're

clipping, anytime you're showing some, but not other parts of portrayal. what mccain here did is important to realize. it's important to understand. what he's saying. the content of his remarks, telling this woman that she needs some straight talk. absolutely, he uttered some sympathetic notes, some gracious notes and was polite to her. that got cut off. there was an editorial decision made by that phoenix tv station that that was somehow not as important as the content and the controversy, some of us on the left think, mccain telling this woman who lost her son less than a year ago to gun violence there's no will in congress to pass an assault weapons ban and that's truly unfortunate. what he didn't say, part of the reason that will doesn't exist because people like him in the past supported all the weapons ban doesn't think this is an opportune time, this

is-- >> including many senate democrats, including many senate democrats and that's the reason we're told right now there's not going to be success for this thing in the the democratically controlled senate. i want to ask you, senator mccain's office put out a statement they're not happen. obviously a case of selective editing to distort what you said and people do deserve to hear his honest opinion whether this bill important to women like this will make it or not make it it. the woman is unhappy and apparently expressed disappointment theway he handled it and surprised by his indifference reportedly. is there an obligation now to go back and correct the record so the americans who saw this at ktvk's audience and other audience at least know what he tried to say? >> yeah, i think anybody who aired it in a way that was misleading should go back and inform their viewers or their listeners otherwise, but it's also important to note that the senator is absolutely correct, that the assault weapons ban in its current form is not going to pass and

you know, one of the reasons for that is that the justice department is not going to make a difference. an internal memo leaked last week said this is not going to have an effect on gun violence, a discernible effect. so, it needs he to get back to the issue, is this something that's going to help the problem of gun violence and you know, the senator's correct that it's not going to pass and the reason it's not going to pass is that even its proponents acknowledge this is not going to solve the problem. >> it it happened on thursday and i'm told that they did not correct it on friday, but here we are on monday and mark, you expect quickly, an update today? >> i think so, i don't think there's any admission of guilty or-- i think what happened is that senator mccain made a statement and they edited it down to the aspect of what that statement was and to the credit, senator mccain has been courageous. >> megyn: got to run. >> this time to the-- >> thank you both, we'll be right back. hi. i'm henry winkler.

and i'm here to tell homeowners that are 62 and older about a great way to live a better retirement.

it's called a reverse mortgage. [ male announcer ] call right now to receive your free dvd and booklet with no obligation. it answers questions like how a reverse mortgage works, how much you qualify for, the ways to receive your money, and more. plus, when you call now, you'll get this magnifier with l.e.d. light absolutely free. when you call the experts at one reverse mortgage today, you'll learn the benefits of a government-insured reverse mortgage. it will eliminate your monthly mortgage payments and give you tax-free cash from the equity in your home. and here's the best part -- you still own your home. take control of your retirement today. ♪ ♪

>> breaking news from washington where the white house is taking new questions today about the president's former political team. they are now reportedly fund raising across the country with the goal of creating one of washington's most powerful lobbying groups and some are asking if they're already crossing some fund raising lines. shannon bream has the story live from washington, shannon? >> reporter: well, megyn, organizing for action, ofa, keeping the president's frame work personnel rebranded as a social welfare group. and jim messina will head up the new group and raising eyebrows because it sounds an awful like the superpacs that mr. obama spent so much time denigrating during the last election. >> toward democracy and the only way to fight it, the only

way to match their millions of dollars is with millions of voices who are raised-- who are ready to finish what we started in 2008. >> reporter: the goal was to raise 15 million dollars in order to push for things like tougher new gun control laws and immigration reform. the organization will be able to do so free of federal contribution limits and other election reporting requirements. a large portion of the group's funding will reportedly come from donors who bring in half a million dollars and get a chance to meet with the president among other perks and bob edgar has the nonpartisan watch dog group common cause says, quote, it just smells. the president is setting a very bad model setting up an organization like this. just minutes ago, our own ed henry at the white house press briefing room and asked jay carney about this and allegations it sounds to some

people like they will be selling the access to the press, and jay carney says the president has been fighting for transparency and money out of politics, something he's going to continue to fight to do. carney says it's an independent organization not directly linked to the white house, but it will certainly work on behalf of the president's agenda. megyn. >> megyn: all right. shannon bream. thank you. well, last hour we brought you the breaking news about reports that the supreme court may now take up the case that could ultimately make it illegal to carry a concealed weapon. is that where this country is going? we'll have the legal debate next. and they say everything's bigger in texas. that could include snowstorms. really? the winter weather now hitting some southern states. we'll have an update for u and could be fired for doing the right thing? kelly's court takes on the case of a bartender who calls the cops on a drunk driver only to find herself without a job when all was said and done. >> he said i'm going to have to fire you because couldn't

have a bartender who calls the cops. i stand by what i did and i could do it again.

i was having trouble getting out of bed in the morning because my back hurt so bad. the sleep number bed conforms to you. i wake up in the morning with no back pain. do you toss and turn? wake up with back pain? if so, call us now. you'll learn how the sleep number bed helps relieve back pain by allowing you to adjust the firmness and support to conform to your body for a more proper spinal alignment. just look at this research... ® 93% of participants experienced back-pain relief.

plus it's a great value because it costs about the same an innerspring yet lasts twice as long. so if you want to sleep better or find relief for your bad back, call now. call the number on your screen for your free information kit with dvd brochure and price list. call now and we'll include a free $50 savings card. call now for your free information and this free $50 savings card. call now! >> the second major winter storm in just over a week. bringing the central plains to a stand still. blizzard warnings remain in effect from new mexico aument w all the way to new mexico and kansas and three foot snowdrifts in texas and

oklahoma. the national guard has been activated and officials are asking people to stay off the roads. some skis could see as much as 18 inches of snow before system is finished. the top stories, a big development in the gun control debate that could ultimately be decided by the supreme court. at issue your constitutional right to carry a concealed weapons. some 18 million americans have conceal carry permits the. two courts, one in denver and the other in chicago have handed down exactly opposite, opposing rulings about the right to have a concealed carry permit under the second amendment. if it passes, this is usually the highest court in the land to step in and decide it. joining me now two scholars for the house judiciary committee and former staff for the reform committee and

jordan sekulow and he's a sekulow is in jay sekulow, but we love having jordan, too, dia-opposing-- that's not a word. >> diametrically opposing. >> megyn: thank you. now, we have the 7th circuit which tends to be a little more liberal than the 10th circuit, right? and the 2nd circuit says you to have right to conceal carry and the 10th circuit in in, that rose out of colorado says, no you don't. let me start with you, julian, this is likely to go to the supreme court and what is likely to happen. >> i think it's likely to go to the supreme court. and the 7th says it's right to defense outside the home not necessarily conceal carry. and the 10th circuit is much more in line what the supreme court court said in the heller case nthat case the second amendment is a limited

individual right and protects only or only dealt with the protection of a handgun inside the home. and in fact, the court said that nothing in the case, and this is almost a direct quote. nothing in the case calls into question longstanding prohibitions that had been in place and one of the prohibitions that the court cited, a majority opinion, was concealed weapons and i think the likely ability of states to have very strict regulations or even prohibitions on concealed weapons is likely to be upheld by the supreme court. >> megyn: jordan, i credit julian, he got the u.s. court's heller decision, and couple years ago in heller, the majority of the 19th century court to consider the question held that prohibitions on carrying concealed weapons were lawful under the 2nd amendment or otherwise. and they say nothing in our opinion should being taken to cast doubt on the longstanding

prohibitions, that should have some conceal carry advocates a little concerned. >> sure, it wasn't an issue-- i mean, that was in the case and that wasn't something that you could hold and say this was the purpose of heller or mcdonald for that matter and you look at the 10th circuit first. let's look there and all this have case is about, someone who isn't a citizen of colorado give a concealed carry permit know whether there is concealed carry permits available to the citizens or people who have a permit in another state which has reciprocity, in typical line with most states and virginia and others and may have a license and they grant reciprocity with and may not. in illinois, there was a complete ban and what the court said there in the 7th circuit, we' are not going to completely ban this. >> megyn: you're saying that when you look at the facts, the illinois decision is much more akin to sort of the broad question of whether there's a constitutional right to conceal carry in colorado. >> and debate how far it goes. that's what we're debating

here. how much of a right. second amendment right, should it be left up to the state and open carry, what does the word bear mean in the second amendment. to look at the cases and say that the 10th circu trying to restrict at all. this was about whether you have a right, without the permit that has reciprocity, nie you're not a citizen. and the broader question, what does it mean? we've said you can keep arms, now how far do we go when you say you can bear. >> megyn: julian, the illinois court came out and said, look, it would be to speak of bearing arms within your home if that's what they meant you have the right to bear arms within your home and only within your home and not concealed carry outside of your home would have been an awkward usage of that phrase and why they said at that right to bear arms i am mice a right to carry a loaded gun outside of the home. >> well, that's right. that's what the inference, i think, is. in the 7th circuit court, where it says that the right

to self-defense is a right that extends outside the home. if that is very much up in the question, particularly, and i think that jordan is right what happened in the heller case, but the court was very, very clear that it was saying that nothing cast doubt on prohibitions like conceal carry prohibitions and i don't know how much more clear you can be. >> it's not the law of the case. >> it's language. >> sort of like over here. >> but the court rarely gets in and makes such a declaratory kind of judgment like that and it was pretty declaratory there. you have a right to privacy and it's stronger inside the home and once you're outside the home, it's stronger to regulate under the construction. >> it's a right to-- it's almost customizable. a general principle that the court may have to decide and how it applies for each state, it's got to be different for washington d.c. or virginia than maryland and chicago illinois. and colorado.

>> do you think there's a likelihood? is it possible in your mind, jordan, we could wind up with a supreme court ruling that says there is no constitutional right to conceal carry and 8 million americans who now have that right could potentially lose it? >> i don't think the supreme court would ban concealed carry. i'm not sure they would necessarily say that there is a constitutional right in the second amendment that you have to allow a specific kind of carey when you talk about the word bear. is the court going to say that a state allows open carry of your firearms? you have to allow conceal permits and allow people from other states. i think it's going to be more nairo. >> megyn: it's one of those things, julian-- let me just say, julian, one of those things where the supreme court agrees there's no constitutional right to allow to conceal carry and start to see more and more states pass bans on conceal carry and err on the side of restricting that. >> and many states don't have concealed carry and what the

supreme court would be saying if it says that concealed weapons can be regulated where the supreme court would be, up to the states and by the way, a conservative view to let them be left up to the state. what it says if they're left up to the state. if you go to what the supreme court state earlier when it cited concealed weapons if there's a sound basis for regulation and if you look at the data on this and look at places like new york where there are strong concealed weapons laws and crimes have gone down, flint, michigan, they've liberalized and crimes gone up, if you look at the data that shows that handguns are used in -- a number of justifiable homicides according to the fbi was 200. we had 10,000 criminal homicides with guns last year, according to the bureau of justice statistics gunses are used ten times more-- >> and let me-- >> let him finish. >> let me finish the point. handguns-- or guns are used ten times

more frequently to commit a crime than prevent a crime and regulate things like concealed weapons, i think it's on strong grounds. >> megyn: give you the last word, jordan. >> there are states and keeping in glove compartment of your car and you may not have to have a permit in the compartment. this is more a state's issue here is the 2nd amendment, this is the broad powers how we define the rights and you interpret that and apply it to your state. >> megyn: i have to tell you that's a difficult segment to me. we've got jay and jordan and then the jay-- and julian, jordan, and goes to jay sekulow lurking and all the jays. >> even more clearly that the apple doesn't fall from the tree in the case of the sekulows. >> megyn: not easy for you julian. >> thank you. >> megyn: and he is the center of the oscar story you probably have not heard.

the rare red carpet shoutout for the man responsible in part for leading the united states to usama bin laden. we'll tell you about it. and this bartender says she thought she was doing the right thing calling the cops after a regular customer who was drunk decided to hit the road in his car. her thanks? she got fired. that's next in kelly's court. >> i called the police, i said we have a very drunk person leaving the bar. he is going to kill someone or himself. ♪ you know my heart burns for you... ♪

i'm up next, but now i'm sging the heartburn blues. hold on, prilosec isn't for fast relief. cue up alka-seltzer. it stops heartburn fast. ♪ oh what a relief it is!

. >> kelly's court on the docket today. a bartender who thought she was doing the right thing twyla said she was proud to work at the american legion's post. and when she said the man was in no position to drive and they pulled over the guy say

he blew twice the legal limit on the breathalyzer. she did not get a that from the boss. >> he says i'm going to have to fire you, we can't have a bartender who will call the cops. i stand by what i it and would do it again. >> was that firing legal? >> here to cuss idiscuss it, i t know, you tell me, david, whether this is lawful to boot her out for essentially whistle blowing? now, megyn did twyla said, when she got to work he was hammered and she served him enough. her job is it to avoid abetting further intoxication that and not further prosecution of the customers of her own bar. >> she calls his family, she calls his wife, son or daughter or she calls a taxi,

fantastic, great ideas all of them, but to call the police, what you're doing is saying to all patrons of that business, you come here, and you risk, whoa, one beer maybe i'll call the cops if you have one, two, three, maybe call him then. it's the kiss of death for the business to do that kind of thing and the bar owner was perfectly within his right. >> megyn: you're on the bar owner's side. okay, but mark, if she hadn't called the cops and the guy hits and hurts somebody while drunk driving his car, twyla and her boss, the bar, would have opinibeen in a whole lot o trouble. >> of course, and i understand what david's trying to do so there's a balancing test here. on one side of the scale, you have the fact that every other minute someone is seriously injured as a result of a drunk driving crash. every half hour, someone is killed in this country as a result of a drunk driving crash. last year alone, 16,000 people

were killed at the hands of a drunk driver. that's on one side of the scale and the other side of the scale, it's the strong desire to sell fuzzy navals and tequila shots. this is a no-brainer. >> megyn: the thing is, he's right the stakes are so high and ohio is one of the few states where the drunk driving rate is going up and the injuries are going up, they're not paying attention apparently to the messages, but the thing is, if that guy hit somebody and that person hit by the drunk driver would have had the right to sue the american legion and potentially the bartender both and the laws make them exposed so if you're the bartender, why not call the police and say i'm going to protect myself and my establishment? >> you know, most laws don't allow the dramshop laws prevent bars from being liable for civil suit. >> megyn: but ohio does. >> but unless you engage in further intoxication of the patron when you already know he's he drunk, and that's precisely what happened here. so, if there had been a crash in this instance, it's likely

that the bar would have been on the hook, megyn, the reality of the situation. >> megyn: what's she supposed to do, david, at that point. off you go, you're probably twice the legal limit. go ahead and hurt somebody. >> that's a great idea, megyn. maybe they should have a breathalyzer there or something to tell, if he actually is intoxicated where is the line drawn? i mean, if somebody has a beer or two and she says, you know, i don't know, he looks kind of-- >> she's a professional in a sense, mark, she's a professional. are you telling-- who better to detect anecdot anecdotally than a bartender. >> then why did she serve him another. >> david desperately wants to change the facts. there was no doubt in her mind there was impaired. bloodshot eyes and slurred speech. and no question that he was hammered and gosh she was right. double drunk according to the breathalyzer. >> megyn: but david you raise a legitimate point as well. why did she serve of him another beer.

listen to her describe again what went down. >> i came into work. he was already there pretty much hammered. he ordered a beer, i gave it to him and i started trying to slow it down in serving him. i called the police, i said we have a very drunk person leaving the bar. he is going to kill someone or himself. >> megyn: now, police in texas recently arrested a texas bartender after she was found to have provided a patron with a few too many drinks, so, could-- could she be in trouble for having served him those extra drinks? >> well, fortunately, there was no crash here, no one was injured or killed. >> megyn: and why is that, david? >> well. >> megyn: oh. >> because he got lucky perhaps. >> megyn: how did he get lucky? the bartender turned him in. >> megyn, why don't i call the bar owner you know what i'm going to do call the police. should i? maybe it might damage the business i'm concerned, she had no business doing that unless the bar owner himself

gives her authorization to say, okay, i think it's a good idea. i don't think he would have. >> megyn: she has no business doing it, mark, no business. >> and-- >> you're out of your mind. you have children, i have children. i don't want a guy on the road, and i would have called him a cab or his wife. >> listen. >> somaybe shy didn't know his wife's name, and who are you going to call. >> i'm concerned about your level of intoxication, you need a ride home. >> star prosecution witness against your own customer it didn't fly. >> megyn: and something-- mo cares about saving the lives of those people in ohio, mark? >> oh, please. >> megyn, aim start to go move for sanctions against this guy. >> megyn: granted, granted. rule 11. >> and i'm trying to save this guy's business. >> megyn: you're out of order and the giant take a walk, david. >> the court would say i won. >> megyn: thanks, guys, thank you. >> thank you.

>> well, the kathryn bigelow film "zero dark thirty" shall about the hunt for usama bin laden got several nominations for its portrayal of our official track him down. neither the movie or actors won any awards last night and some critics suggesting a backlash how the movie depicted torture, some suggesting glamourized it or it works. and on the red carpet they pushed for the release this have man. pakistani doctor who played a key role in helping them track and kill bin laden and remains behind bars. which is controversial. dominic di-natale is here. >> hey, meg, how are you doing. the dr. afridi has caught the

attention of hollywood. and finally caught the attention of the stars on the red carpet. the lead actress in the movie, jessica chastain played the fbi agent who relentlessly pursued bin laden shared her angst for dr. afridi and plight by the pakistanis. >> i'm not a policy maker, but i definitely believe that we should do whatever we can to release anyone held, it try to find him and, yeah, it breaks me heart to think he's still in prison. >> reporter: they say when hollywood speaks the rest of the world listens. one of her co-stars, the guy that played the cia agent who do the water-boarding very controversially in the film, spoke out about it, and very much knew really what it it happened to afridi and had knowledge about it. jason clark, take a listen. >> i think it's wrong that

he's held and i think we should do a little more than just find the 30 million dollars and-- >> we're going to hear reaction from washington as a result of what we heard on the red carpet last night and later on this week we believe a resolution on the house, in the house, at the hands of dana rohrbach, the california congressman and make an effort to bring it to washington's attention. >> megyn: thank you. apparently "zero dark thirty" won like a technical award and didn't win any of the big categories and some wondering whether it was backlash. speaking of back, we'll be right. when you have diabetes... your doctor will say get smart about your weight. that's why there's glucerna hunger smart shakes. they have carb steady, with carbs that digest slowly

to help minimize blood sugar spikes. [ male announcer ] glucerna hunger smart. a smart way to help manage hunger and diabetes.